You don't need rotation to create artificial gravity, you need constant acceleration. This is what the rotation in space odyssey does, and they might as well keep accelerating their craft at 1.0g, and then turn the craft around halfway and keep decelerate in 1.0g to get the same effect.
I care, mostly because I want everyone to stop using javascript on their website to do trivial things. Imagine how many exploits that would have been prevented if people just didn't enable javascript.
Yet another person who doesn't understand the difference between a digital copy of something and a physical object. That analogy is really bad, and by using it you only make yourself look like a fool.
Child pornography is the rape of a child for the sexual entertainment of an adult.
Child pornography may be documentation of said rape, not the actual crime.
Distribution of the video is an added kick for the rapist
How do you know this? And should something be a crime because a rapist enjoy it?
a lasting hurt for the victim
I'm not a psychologist, but I have a feeling a victim of child abuse have much worse things to worry about than searching the web for images of themselves.
and can be quite profitable as well.
A lot of things are profitable, most of these are legal.
You are not an innocent when you download and retain evidence of a rape.
Is it illegal to own a copy or image of every type of crime evidence?
You are not an innocent when you are a client - a customer - who is in the market for more of the same.
What if you're not a client or customer, but just get everything for free?
The feeling I get here is that you simply think it's morally wrong, and want to ban it because of that. Then inventing random arguments to support it.
You sound a little confused here. It's not that the OS doesn't know it's a flash drive, the problem is that you can not access the actual flash chips through the SATA interface. You can't tell the chip to "erase flash block N", since there's no such thing in the SATA interface. No OS can get around this without help from the SSD manufacturers and a standard way to access the real flash chips inside.
Why do you have to, or want to use apt-get at all? The updates are automatic.
Even my girlfriend prefers to use the command line though, since it's of course much faster to use since you don't have to point and click and search for the options, you just type what you want and then it's done.
You mean that you never get any compilation errors when you compile programs on your mac? If you claim that, then both you and I know you're just plain lying.
What do you do if the stick isn't in your appstore, and no one have compiled it for mac? How is this different than if it's not in your repository and no one compiled it for linux?
you just head your browser on over to the mint software portal, click a catagory, click the program, and mintInstall will download the program for you
Exactly. Every time I dig into the Linux-software-install problem, the answers are always "oh, it's easy, just do X and Y and Z and P and D and Q
Ok I know, don't feed the troll, but seriously, if you buy a mac, are all applications pre-installed? Or how do you do it on a mac if you don't do: "head your browser on over to the apple software portal, click a category, click the program, and MacBrowser will download the program for you". Can you reduce the number of steps there? How is this different from the linux way?
Is the mac installer placed directly on the desktop? In Ubuntu it's in the first menu, spaced out a bit so it's easier to find than any other option.
What do you do when the program isn't available for the mac? Fortunately for you, the macs these days are based on unix, so you can actually ask someone to help you download and compile the program, or do it for you, exactly like in linux.
You are comparing a low level package manager with a high level application chooser. I don't know if you're a troll or just ignorant. Compare with the high level "Add/Remove" and see which one is more difficult.
And you seem to be one of those that doesn't understand what "Information wants to be free" means, and how the question in the article actually shows one of the ideas behind that sentence.
The meaning with "Information wants to be free" is that it is very very difficult to contain information. You can't stop it from spreading, even if you would like to. It doesn't matter if you don't want it to be free or open, it will spread anyway.
Blocking some people from a website is also bound to fail, maybe not for the same reason, but for similar reasons, information will flow around blocks, as longs as someone wants to access it.
But making linux more appealing for the masses means better hardware support from the manufacturers, and more interest in general from companies like intel to support it. Just because you have a fancy GUI for the unenlightened doesn't mean you have to stop using the shell.
Can it autocomplete options for all commands? As far as I know, it can only autocomplete filenames, which is not very intersting (I remember my Amiga doing this back in the 90ies, and most linux/unix shells have done this since like, the 17th century)
Then of course, bash can autocomplete options these days too, it does this by default in ubuntu for example.
Every time someone comes up with an example "but it's so difficult finding programs" I always try on my own debian machine.
"apt-cache search aac" returned about 20 files, of these a handful of audio players that can play AAC files, for example:
audacious - small and fast audio player which supports lots of formats
cmus - lightweight ncurses audio player
faad - freeware Advanced Audio Decoder player
I don't understand how this can be difficult? How can it be easier?
Searching for 'aac windows player' on google gives me links to winamp (proprietary adware), "orban" that I've never heard of, seems to be some flash-plugin? Some apple-forum and wikipedia.
Streaming lowres shows using more or less proprietary players is far from what the parent was asking. NRK did it for years as well. Nobody wants that. This is the only way that they can compete with "piracy".
"lossy" when referring to an audio recording doesn't refer to the fact that the media itself will not degrade, it refers to the fact that the waveform as stored/reproduced does not perfectly record the waveform as originally played. ... You are literally losing some of the information in the waveform because you have to throw it away as a necessary step in saving the data on a computer
This was true in the eighties. Today the 'waveform' is mostly, or exclusively, digital from the start, depending on the artist of course. A major part of the music I listen to at the moment has never existed as a waveform at any point, until I actually play it back.
You're also incorrect in saying that all analogue formats are necessarily lossy. There are perfectly lossless methods of recording sound that have been around as long as recording has been around.
I'm not really sure what you're getting at here. If any electronics were involved, it's lossy by default since there will be added noise, thermal or others. And I don't think you are seriously claiming that a mechanical device for recording onto a wax cylinder will accurately reproduce the full signal either, for any useful range of frequencies. My physics is a bit rusty but I suppose mechanical friction will introduce noise in the process as much as electrical resistance.
No, a CD is not lossy since it will exactly record the information you send it. You can replay the information as many times you want, and it will return exactly the information you stored, unless the disc is physically damaged or degraded.
All known analogue formats are lossy, since there will always be noise added through the electronic components necessary to record the signal.
Most of those damn singers / musicians / sound / video etc are richer than a good bunch of us here
False. A huge, incredibly vast majority of all musicians hardly make any money at all from their hobby. Due to the copyright monopoly laws and clustering effects, a tiny fraction will be able to rise to the top, become a "star" so to speak. This is exactly what the record companies want, because they only have to bother with a handful of people, it makes it easier with marketing and chart placements etc etc.
Hopefully the "pirate movement" will eventually equalize this a bit, making the big stars bleed a bit, and moving the money from the top to some of the others. When the record companies no longer can easily dictate what artists will get radiotime and shelf space, but the music is mostly spread and marketed through word-of-mouth and P2P sites, there's a lot more room for small and medium artists.
The issue isn't really that GCC isn't portable, but it's quite bloated, so there's a lot of room for alternative compilers. You simply don't want a full GCC install on a 32MB flash device for example, even if you might want a compiler installed.
The Associated Press (AP) is an American news agency. The AP is a cooperative owned by its contributing newspapers, radio and television stations in the United States
Perhaps this is the reason that I had never heard about "AP"? It's not being used outside your country, but I suppose USA means "The World". I guess you'll wake up sooner or later.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't need rotation to create artificial gravity, you need constant acceleration. This is what the rotation in space odyssey does, and they might as well keep accelerating their craft at 1.0g, and then turn the craft around halfway and keep decelerate in 1.0g to get the same effect.
wooosh!
Maybe that would serve them right for forcing people to run random code on their computer just to be able to buy books from their website?
I care, mostly because I want everyone to stop using javascript on their website to do trivial things. Imagine how many exploits that would have been prevented if people just didn't enable javascript.
Yet another person who doesn't understand the difference between a digital copy of something and a physical object. That analogy is really bad, and by using it you only make yourself look like a fool.
Child pornography is the rape of a child for the sexual entertainment of an adult.
Child pornography may be documentation of said rape, not the actual crime.
Distribution of the video is an added kick for the rapist
How do you know this? And should something be a crime because a rapist enjoy it?
a lasting hurt for the victim
I'm not a psychologist, but I have a feeling a victim of child abuse have much worse things to worry about than searching the web for images of themselves.
and can be quite profitable as well.
A lot of things are profitable, most of these are legal.
You are not an innocent when you download and retain evidence of a rape.
Is it illegal to own a copy or image of every type of crime evidence?
You are not an innocent when you are a client - a customer - who is in the market for more of the same.
What if you're not a client or customer, but just get everything for free?
The feeling I get here is that you simply think it's morally wrong, and want to ban it because of that. Then inventing random arguments to support it.
In the first, you have to be better than 4500, the latter you have to be better than 45.
You sound a little confused here. It's not that the OS doesn't know it's a flash drive, the problem is that you can not access the actual flash chips through the SATA interface. You can't tell the chip to "erase flash block N", since there's no such thing in the SATA interface. No OS can get around this without help from the SSD manufacturers and a standard way to access the real flash chips inside.
Why do you have to, or want to use apt-get at all? The updates are automatic.
Even my girlfriend prefers to use the command line though, since it's of course much faster to use since you don't have to point and click and search for the options, you just type what you want and then it's done.
You mean that you never get any compilation errors when you compile programs on your mac? If you claim that, then both you and I know you're just plain lying.
What do you do if the stick isn't in your appstore, and no one have compiled it for mac? How is this different than if it's not in your repository and no one compiled it for linux?
you just head your browser on over to the mint software portal, click a catagory, click the program, and mintInstall will download the program for you
Exactly. Every time I dig into the Linux-software-install problem, the answers are always "oh, it's easy, just do X and Y and Z and P and D and Q
Ok I know, don't feed the troll, but seriously, if you buy a mac, are all applications pre-installed? Or how do you do it on a mac if you don't do: "head your browser on over to the apple software portal, click a category, click the program, and MacBrowser will download the program for you". Can you reduce the number of steps there? How is this different from the linux way?
Is the mac installer placed directly on the desktop? In Ubuntu it's in the first menu, spaced out a bit so it's easier to find than any other option.
What do you do when the program isn't available for the mac? Fortunately for you, the macs these days are based on unix, so you can actually ask someone to help you download and compile the program, or do it for you, exactly like in linux.
You are comparing a low level package manager with a high level application chooser. I don't know if you're a troll or just ignorant. Compare with the high level "Add/Remove" and see which one is more difficult.
And you seem to be one of those that doesn't understand what "Information wants to be free" means, and how the question in the article actually shows one of the ideas behind that sentence.
The meaning with "Information wants to be free" is that it is very very difficult to contain information. You can't stop it from spreading, even if you would like to. It doesn't matter if you don't want it to be free or open, it will spread anyway.
Blocking some people from a website is also bound to fail, maybe not for the same reason, but for similar reasons, information will flow around blocks, as longs as someone wants to access it.
But making linux more appealing for the masses means better hardware support from the manufacturers, and more interest in general from companies like intel to support it. Just because you have a fancy GUI for the unenlightened doesn't mean you have to stop using the shell.
Can it autocomplete options for all commands? As far as I know, it can only autocomplete filenames, which is not very intersting (I remember my Amiga doing this back in the 90ies, and most linux/unix shells have done this since like, the 17th century)
Then of course, bash can autocomplete options these days too, it does this by default in ubuntu for example.
Every time someone comes up with an example "but it's so difficult finding programs" I always try on my own debian machine.
"apt-cache search aac" returned about 20 files, of these a handful of audio players that can play AAC files, for example:
I don't understand how this can be difficult? How can it be easier?
Searching for 'aac windows player' on google gives me links to winamp (proprietary adware), "orban" that I've never heard of, seems to be some flash-plugin? Some apple-forum and wikipedia.
Streaming lowres shows using more or less proprietary players is far from what the parent was asking. NRK did it for years as well. Nobody wants that. This is the only way that they can compete with "piracy".
Add Linus while you're at it.
"lossy" when referring to an audio recording doesn't refer to the fact that the media itself will not degrade, it refers to the fact that the waveform as stored/reproduced does not perfectly record the waveform as originally played.
...
You are literally losing some of the information in the waveform because you have to throw it away as a necessary step in saving the data on a computer
This was true in the eighties. Today the 'waveform' is mostly, or exclusively, digital from the start, depending on the artist of course. A major part of the music I listen to at the moment has never existed as a waveform at any point, until I actually play it back.
You're also incorrect in saying that all analogue formats are necessarily lossy. There are perfectly lossless methods of recording sound that have been around as long as recording has been around.
I'm not really sure what you're getting at here. If any electronics were involved, it's lossy by default since there will be added noise, thermal or others. And I don't think you are seriously claiming that a mechanical device for recording onto a wax cylinder will accurately reproduce the full signal either, for any useful range of frequencies. My physics is a bit rusty but I suppose mechanical friction will introduce noise in the process as much as electrical resistance.
No, a CD is not lossy since it will exactly record the information you send it. You can replay the information as many times you want, and it will return exactly the information you stored, unless the disc is physically damaged or degraded.
All known analogue formats are lossy, since there will always be noise added through the electronic components necessary to record the signal.
I for one, accidentally the average consumer.
Why don't you, like, click the link and find out?
Most of those damn singers / musicians / sound / video etc are richer than a good bunch of us here
False. A huge, incredibly vast majority of all musicians hardly make any money at all from their hobby. Due to the copyright monopoly laws and clustering effects, a tiny fraction will be able to rise to the top, become a "star" so to speak. This is exactly what the record companies want, because they only have to bother with a handful of people, it makes it easier with marketing and chart placements etc etc.
Hopefully the "pirate movement" will eventually equalize this a bit, making the big stars bleed a bit, and moving the money from the top to some of the others. When the record companies no longer can easily dictate what artists will get radiotime and shelf space, but the music is mostly spread and marketed through word-of-mouth and P2P sites, there's a lot more room for small and medium artists.
The issue isn't really that GCC isn't portable, but it's quite bloated, so there's a lot of room for alternative compilers. You simply don't want a full GCC install on a 32MB flash device for example, even if you might want a compiler installed.
Ok, let's check the wikipedia article:
The Associated Press (AP) is an American news agency. The AP is a cooperative owned by its contributing newspapers, radio and television stations in the United States
Perhaps this is the reason that I had never heard about "AP"? It's not being used outside your country, but I suppose USA means "The World". I guess you'll wake up sooner or later.